Embolization of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure devices: Timing, management and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder embolization is an infrequent but serious complication. OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe timing, management and clinical outcomes of device embolization in a multi-center registry. METHODS: Patient characteristics, imaging findings and procedure and follow-up data were collected retrospectively. Device embolizations were categorized according to 1) timing 2) management and 3) clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-seven centers contributed data. Device embolization occurred in 108 patients. In 70.4 % of cases, it happened within the first 24 h of the procedure. The device was purposefully left in the LA and the aorta in two (1.9 %) patients, an initial percutaneous retrieval was attempted in 81 (75.0 %) and surgery without prior percutaneous retrieval attempt was performed in 23 (21.3 %) patients. Two patients died before a retrieval attempt could be made. In 28/81 (34.6 %) patients with an initial percutaneous retrieval attempt a second, additional attempt was performed, which was associated with a high mortality (death in patients with one attempt: 2.9 % vs. second attempt: 21.4 %, p < 0.001). The primary outcome (bailout surgery, cardiogenic shock, stroke, TIA, and/or death) occurred in 47 (43.5 %) patients. Other major complications related to device embolization occurred in 21 (19.4 %) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of device embolizations after LAA closure occurs early. A percutaneous approach is often the preferred method for a first rescue attempt. Major adverse event rates, including death, are high particularly if the first retrieval attempt was unsuccessful. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: This dedicated multicenter registry examined timing, management, and clinical outcome of device embolization. Early embolization (70.4 %) was most frequent. As a first rescue attempt, percutaneous retrieval was preferred in 75.0 %, followed by surgical removal (21.3 %). In patients with a second retrieval attempt a higher mortality (death first attempt: 2.9 % vs. death second attempt: 24.1 %, p < 0.001) was observed. Mortality (10.2 %) and the major complication rate after device embolization were high.

Evaluación de la Efectividad del Tratamiento Oftálmico con Eye Drops #2® en Pacientes con Conjuntivitis Alérgica / Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Ophthalmic treatment with Eye Drops # 2® in Patients with Allergic Conjunctivitis

El presente artículo muestra los resultados de un estudio que evaluó la efectividad de un medicamento oftálmico homeopático (Eye Drops #2®) en pacientes con conjuntivitis alérgica. 33 personas con antecedentes de respuesta positiva a la aplicación vía tópica ocular de alergeno se evaluaron a través de un modelo aleatorizado, doble ciego y controlado con placebo. Los participantes recibieron un alergeno solubilizado en dos visitas distintas, a fin de evaluar factores como la hiperemia conjuntival, epiescleral y ciliar, así como la quemosis, la hinchazón del párpado, el lagrimeo y la picazón. Luego de esto se les asignaron aleatoriamente dos frascos enmascarados con la indicación de que el contenido de uno se aplicaría en el glóbulo ocular derecho y el otro en el izquierdo (uno contenía el medicamento y el otro placebo). En una tercera visita, posterior al tratamiento, se evaluaron la comodidad y la seguridad del tratamiento, además de que se aplicó una dosis final de alergeno. Los resultados finales mostraron una reducción estadísticamente significativa de los síntomas y los signos de la conjuntivitis alérgica inducida durante la visita 3, por lo que el producto parece ser cómodo y seguro de usar. (AU)

This article presents the results of a study that evaluated the effectiveness of a homeopathic ophthalmic medication (Eye Drops #2®) in patients with allergic conjunctivitis. 33 subjects with a history of positive response to topical ocular allergen challenge were evaluated in a randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled study. The subjects received a solubilized allergen in two different visits, to evaluate factors such as conjunctival, episcleral, and ciliary hyperemia, chemosis, eyelid swelling, tearing, and itching. After this, the subjects were randomly assigned to two masked bottles labeled right and left, one containing the active drug and the other containing a placebo. On a third visit, after the treatment, comfort and safety were assessed, and a final dose of allergen was applied. The final results showed a statistically significant reduction in the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis induced during visit 3, so the product seems to be comfortable and safe to use. (AU)